Page images
PDF
EPUB

he underwent many troubles for nonconformity. While in the former situation, he experienced the cruel oppressions of the times, and was apprehended and committed to close prison, where he remained a long time. During his confinement, the inhabitants at Northampton presented a supplication to Queen Elizabeth, humbly and earnestly beseeching her majesty to grant his release, and his restoration to his beloved ministry. In this supplication they affirmed upon their dutiful allegiance, that during his abode in that place, he had lived an honest and a peaceable life, and gave a high character of his diligence in preaching, his obedience to God, and to those in authority. It does not appear, however, whether this application was at all successful. It is very probable he never returned to his charge at Northampton.

Having at length obtained his release, he most probably entered upon his ministerial charge in the city of Coventry. The oppressed puritans being desirous to be eased of their heavy burdens, Mr. Fenn was unanimously chosen by the London ministers, to accompany the Earl of Leicester, in a presentation of their afflictions and desires to those in authority; but with what success, we have not been able to learn. He consented to this appointment, saying "that he was ready to run, whenever the church commanded him." It is said to have been his opinion, that impropriations, which were attached to her majesty, to colleges, &c. ought to be set to the pastors; and that all tythes, which are appendages by some composition, should be paid to the ministers in specie. It is also observed, that he accounted it unlawful to receive the sacrament at the hands of a dumb minister, or to attend the ordinary service of the church without a sermon.*

Upon the publication of Whitgift's three articles, and the persecutions which followed, he was cited to Lambeth, and, refusing to subscribe, was immediately suspended. When he appeared before the archbishop, he was urged by many arguments, to subscribe; and he, on the contrary, endea voured to answer those arguments, stating his reasons for refusal. This was as follows:

Archbishop. Your subscription is required by the statute of 13 Eliz.

.

Fenn. That statute extendeth no further than the confession of christian faith, and the doctrine of the sacraments.

* Baker's MS. Collec. vol. xv. p. 73, 78.

A. There is provision in the statute of 7 Eliz., that the queen, with her high commissioners, or the archbishop, may take further order.

F. The proviso of 7 Eliz. can have no relation to 13 Eliz., which was some years after. And the proviso expresseth how far it is to be extended: not to taking away and establishing ceremonies.

A. But so much of the canon law is still in force, as is not contrary to God's word; and you have promised canonical obedience.

F. But the question is, whether the things required be agreeable to God's word? And not only so, there is no canon which requires us to subscribe to the judgment of our ordinary.

A. That I allow; but the law hath charged the bishop to see that all things for the ministry be duly observed, as by law established; and I take this order for the more effectual execution of things already established.

F. Your care and diligence in the execution of laws must be according to law, and not contrary to law; that is, by admonition, by suspension, by sequestration, or by deprivation, as the case may require. But these proceedings are not according to law; but an inquisition into our hearts and consciences, for which there is no law.

A. I make this a decree and order for the whole of my province, and, therefore, is to be observed as if it had been made before.

F. No one person, nor any number of persons, hath authority to make decrees or constitutions, except in convocation; which must be called together by the king's writ: As 25 Henry VIII. and 1 Eliz., which is entitled, "The Submission of the Clergy.'

[ocr errors]

A. I have the queen's consent.

F. But that consent was not according to law provided in this behalf. Nor was it done in convocation.

A. I have the consent of my brethren and some others. F. That was not according to the order of convocation, wherein we are to have our free choice of clerks.*

Mr. Fenn remained under suspension a long time, during the whole of which period his cure was totally neglected.+ But by the kind favour of the Earl of Leicester, as appears from his letter to the archbishop, dated July 14, 1585, he was at length restored to his ministry, when he returned to

* MS. Register, p. 592.

+ Ibid. p. 745.

bis charge in Coventry. The same honourable person also promised, that he would treat with the bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, to obtain his favourable allowance. Though this excellent divine might probably enjoy peace and quietness for a season, his troubles were not ended. In the year 1591, an information was exhibited against him and many of his brethren, for being concerned in the classis, atending their associations, and subscribing the "Book of Discipline;" when they were all apprehended, and committed to prison. A circumstantial account of these proceedings, together with their examinations and endeavours to procure their deliverance, is given in another place.+ These worthy sufferers, during their confinement, presented a long letter to the queen, dated April, 1592, in vindication of their own innocency. It does not, indeed, appear how long a time they remained in prison, after that period.

Upon Mr. Fenn's release, he most probably returned to Coventry, where he spent the rest of his days. He died in a firm attachment to those principles for which he suffered. Mr. Clark observes, that he was famous for his ministry and nonconformity in the city of Coventry; and that in his last will and testament, he made so full and open a protestation against the hierarchy and ceremonies, that when his will was tendered to be proved, the prelates, or those of their party, would not allow it to have a place among the records of the court.§

DANIEL WIGHT was a zealous minister of Christ, but greatly harassed for many years, on account of his nonconformity. It is very probable that he preached at some place in London or its vicinity. In the year 1573, when Mr. Johnson and others were sent to the Gatehouse, Mr. Wight and several of his brethren were committed to Newgate. We do not, however, find how long he remained under the bondage of his enemies. As Mr. Johnson afterwards died under the pressure of his rigorous confinement; so Mr. Wight afterwards obtained his liberty, and was restored to his ministry. He subscribed the "Book of Discipline," and took an active part in the associations; for + See Art. Thomas Cartwright.

Strype's Whitgift, p. 226.
Strype's Annals, vol. iv. p. 85.
Clark's Lives annexed to his Martyrologie, p. 160.
Baker's MS. Collec. vol. xxxii. p. 441, 449.

which his study was broken open, and searched, and his private papers were carried away. Those papers contained some of the resolutions agreed upon at their associations; among which were the following:-" That private baptism is unlawful. That the sign of the cross ought not to be used in baptism.-That the calling of bishops is unlawful. -That the people ought to be taught church discipline.That ministers ought to be called by their flocks.-And that no minister ought to subscribe to the Book of Common Prayer." These were the dangerous resolutions and opinions of Mr. Wight and his brethren, for which they were apprehended and cast into prison. They were most shamefully reproached and insulted in the high commission and star-chamber; and were under confinement in the year 1592, having been in prison nearly two years. Whether Mr. Wight continued much longer in bondage, we cannot ascertain.+

WILLIAM PROUDLOVE was a respectable puritan minister, who, about the year 1562, became vicar of Fansley in Northamptonshire; and in 1577, he became rector of Lamport in the same county. He united with his brethren in their private associations, and took an active part in promoting the desired ecclesiastical discipline; for which, in the year 1590, he was apprehended and cast into prison, where he remained a long time. He was often carried before the high commission and the star-chamber, when he underwent the severe scrutiny and examination of his ecclesiastical inquisitors; but refused the oath ex officio. On one of these occasions, the following interrogatories were proposed to him:

"Whether have not you put in practice that opinion or determination of those that labour for a discipline and government by eldership, whereby they hold, that a godly minister is not to rest in or obey the suspension or deprivation of bishops or their officers, as it is practised in the church of England?-Whether were you suspended or excommunicated by your ordinary, and, nevertheless, did preach and execute your ministry, during such suspension or excommunication; and what moved you so to do?Whether have you besides the presentation by the patron, + See Art. Cartwright. vol. i. p. 95, 113.

Strype's Whitgift, p. 291, 292.
Bridges's Hist. of Northamptonshire,
See Art. Cartwright.

and institution of the bishop, unto your late benefice, a trial, examination, ordination, calling, and approbation by some of your brethren and neighbouring ministers assembled in classes or conference? In what manner and form was it performed? By whom, when, and where?". What could his tyrannical judges mean by these iniquitous proceedings, unless it was to force him to become his own accuser, and prove him guilty from his own confession?

JOHN MORE. This learned and pious divine was fellow of Christ's college, Cambridge, where he most probably received his education. After his removal from the university, he became a very popular and useful preacher at St. Andrew's church in the city of Norwich; but here he met with persecution on account of his nonconformity. Having refused to wear the surplice, principally on account of the offence which it gave to others, he was convened before the bishop of the diocese, who told him that it was better to offend a few private persons, than to offend God and disobey the prince. His lordship, indeed, gives him this honourable character: "I have not known that he has at any time spoken against her majesty's book of Injunctions, nor can I find any manner of stubbornness in him. And surely," adds the bishop," he is a godly and learned man, and hath done much good in this city." He was a zealous champion for the purity of the gospel, and a bold opposer of all false doctrine, as appears from his public contest with the famous Dr. Pern of Cambridge. What a pity then was it, that a divine, endowed with such excellent qualifications, should have been interrupted in his public ministry.

The prelates rigorously imposing the ceremonies upon the clergy, Mr. More, with his brethren in and about Norwich, were among the numerous sufferers. These divines, seeing the approaching storm, prepared for it by presenting their humble supplication to the lords of the council, dated from Norwich, September 25, 1576. In this supplication they declare their great readiness to yield their bodies, their goods, and their lives in the service of

* Baker's MS. Collec. vol. xv. p. 76, 77.

+ Strype's Parker, p. 452.

Strype's Annals, vol. ii. p. 282.

VOL. I.

2 &

« EelmineJätka »